I don't often abandon books. I feel an obligation to finish one if I start it. When there was a copy of Alice In Wonderland coupled with Through the LookingGlass under the Christmas tree I dutifully plowed through the first part, Wonderland, in all diligence feeling totally responsible to Read That Book. I was probably eight years old, and didn't know that the book contained two stories in one. But when the second one began and I realized that nonsense was starting all over again, I put it down and stopped. I simply could not read another story of such rediculousness. I think generally I still feel compelled to finish a book I've started, although not finishing is not the same as taking a long time to get back to it.

Last weekend Papabear and I stumbled (?) into Barnes and Noble for awhile. And there was a table of new books, of course. I don't usually pay too much attention to this table or new novels but this particular one called out to me and promised an interesting read. And it is. It is a good read, the story of a young girl indenturing herself as a servant, circa 1750, to come to America for a better life. I liked everything about it, the setting, the characters, the Scottish brogue, the interesting facts about medicine of the times. Why would I abandon this book?
The deciding factor is another review of the book I found on Librarything. This fellow reader said he/she was disturbed by the violence depicted in the last half of the book. This is a story in early America, there are Indians, and uprisings, so the story is predictable. But according to this reviewer, the encounters are uncomfortably graphic. That did it for me. I chose to stop in a more comfortable setting and finish the book in my own head if at all.
The graphic violence was just the straw for the camel's back in this case. I already was just a bit put off. I cannot understand why those who write or tell stories for other's entertainment just have to be, oh, just a bit offensive, just a little coarse. I can only surmise it is so the writers don't look too prudish or proper or, oh my goodness, modest!!!!???? In this case, this sprinkling of distaste amounted to a jarring distraction. For example, a sweet first kiss is a mouthful of tongue. Did people do that in those days.?? And can you read that and think Mmm? More like Gag and Blech!!!! Threatened catfights have two women calling each other Bi*** and ***re, something that is just too up-to-date to our generation to be believable. There is also a much too long detail of someone relieving himself first thing in the morning. Are you kidding me?? We need to know this?? Other coarse words, not really bad, peppered the pages just enough to elicit a rolling of my eyes as I thought, this author was doing so well, why does she have to ruin it?
She isn't the only one. It happens all too often, as you see it with commediennes who have to toss in some vulgarity so their image isn't too clean. Who would like that??? Hmm...we used to have some really good comedy with none of that. Remember Red Skelton? Or some of the Seventies television shows?
So do I have to state the name of the book here, to not be guilty of some kind of plagierism? That seems awkward, but oh well. The book that almost made it for me is [ Midwife of the Blue Ridge by Christine Blevins], her first. I don't think I'm too prudish. It really is an almost pretty good book. It just needs to grow up.